The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-06-28
SOUGHT FOR SETTLERS
SECRETARY LAMAR LEARNS
SOME or THE OBJECTIONS
From Railroad Companies why the
Several Orders Of Withdrawal
From Settlement OF
THE LANDS WITHIN THEIR In.
DENNY LIMITS
Should Net be Revoked and the
Lands Restored to The Public
Domain.

WASHINGTON, June 27.-The Secre-
tary OF the Interior has received an
awers from all the land grant rsilrosd d.
named in his rule dated May q, 1887,
requiring them TO show cause on or
before June 81, 1887, why the several
orders OF withdrawal from settlement
OF the lands within their indemnity
limits should not be revoked and the
lands embraced therein restored to
settlement. The st. Paul aud Sioux
City Railroad Company. In its answer,
takes the position that IL ls beyond
the power and the Jurisdiction of the
Secretary Of the Interior. as the Law
stands, TO restore to settlement any
lands within the Indemnity limits OF
that company; certainly not until the
grant shall have first been finally ad-
justed. II holds that, 30 far as indem-
nifty limits are concerned, the act5 OF
1857, 1894 and 1855, being in pari ma
terra, the laet two amendatory of the
earlier grant. and all operating upon
precisely the same subject matter, that
Ia to cay upon the selection Of lndem-
nifty lands, stand and must be con-
strued together 20 one enac ment, and
into that enactment In It's entirety is
incorporated the provision which Con-
grees saw ft 10 enact In the seventh
section OF the act Of March 8. 1865,
namely:
1.-THE direction to the Secretary Ct the
Interior to withdraw from market the
land embraced by the provisions OF
the act, and hence the withdrawal OF
all the indemnity lands lying within
twenty miles of the line OF the road
was a legislative withdrawal that
when the secretary OF the Interior is
sued the necessary executive or ad-
ministIative order to carry that with
drawsl into effect, he exhausted all the
powers OF the Land Department over
the subject matter; that as the public
lands Of the United States are only
disposable under the direc ion Of Con-
gress, 1t requires legislation by that
body before Its enactmenta dedicsting
the la ads In question to this particular
purpose can be repealed, modified or
set aside, and that Congress, not bav.
Ing repealed it's legislation with re-
spect TO the grant, any attempt on the
part of an executive officer by way Of
the revocation of the act OF his prede-
cessor is In direct opposition to the
expr essed direction OF Congress"
The st. Paul, Minneapolis aud Mani
toba Railroad company claims that its
grant is not confined to the Slate of
Minnesota, and that it is entitled to
lands lying within ten miles Of either
side OF it's main and branch lines ire
spective Of political boundaries, but
for tie purpose OF testing this question
the company some years ago instituted
sundry suits In the Circuit Court of
the United States for the District of
Minnesota, which have since been ap-
pealed to the Supreme Court OF the
United States, whore they are still
pending; that its indemnity selections,
many OF them made some years ago,
include all the lands within the In.
IDENTITY limits Of It's main and branch
lines, aud that IL Is not owing TO any
fault or neglect whatever on the part
OF the railroad company that the ad-
justment OF Its grant has not long ago
been fully completed. The company
suggests that as selections have been
made for all lands within the indem.
nifty limit, such lands have been placed
sub judico, a1d therefore are removed
from the category OF public lands aud
cannot bs made subj ect to adverse
rights by homestead or presumption
entries or in any other way until the
rights OF the company thereto have
first been examined and adjusted.
The Atlantic and Pacific Company
claims that 1t has not failed to give
ample notice OF its indemnity right,
and claims that the notice heretofore
given already shows that by past and
present selection of all lands within
its limits, the grant as earned Is de-
ficient more than 1000, coo acres that
the contract between the United States
and the Atlantic and Pacific Company
would be seriously violated II, with
knowledge OF these facts, any revoca-
ton OF the existing indemnity with
drawals is made, or other action taken
tending to defeat, impair or cloud the
rights Of the company therein; that
delay In selection has arisen from the
failure OF the United States to make
survey OF the granted and indemnity
lands to ascertain and settle the
boundaries OF the pending small land
CLAIMS with such certainty that the
precise acreage or losB therein can be
determined; 70 permit settlers prior
In time to the railroad grant to make
known their claims, by proper
description, and finally by its
aft rmstive facts In creating Indian
and other reservations within the rail.
road grant, enlarging others therefor
created, and its refusal TO permit sur
,yeys to be made on the company'e de-
| posit OF the cost thereof. Notwith'
standing these difficulties, the com
pany states that It has done all things
possible to Identify liz losses, make ia
selections and submits that neither In
law, equity or good conscience should
the existing withdrawal be reecinded.
The Oregon and California Railroad
| Company, In its answer represents
that the whole number Of old sections
contained within the idemnity limitI
OF the grant will fall by 2S2 900 acres
short OF compensatipg 1t for its landi
lost in place, and as the larger por
tions of these LANDS have never beer
SURVEYED go as to render ii impossible
for the company to make selections o
such lien lands, Il submits that Il
would be a manifest injustice If the
existing orders of Withdrawal should
now be revoked.
Il